HOME PAGE | FACTFILES | QUOTES | COMMENT FORM |
It has been a source of constant frustration to many that ECB have been slow to set out their intentions in respect of the ECB OA, and in particular the plans for training and examining new umpires and scorers. At long last they have sent a letter to all the members of the Officials Association which includes the crucial statement, "I would also like to take this opportunity to confirm that training and examinations through the ECB will be ready for the coming close season".
This letter was sent only to those who have already applied to join ECB OA and also included a Direct Debit Mandate. Full membership is £20.00 (£22 if paid by cheque). This is the same as the current ACU&S subscription but ECB OA, unencumbered by the appalling debts with which Mr. Stuart-King and the Cuckoo Cabinet saddled ACU&S, will not need to increase theirs to £30 next year, nor probably more in future years.
Attached to this letter was an exchange of correspondence between Frank Kemp of ECB, and Steven Wood and Geoff Lowden of ACU&S. The ACU&S responses are simultaneously illuminating and disturbing.
19th April 2006
Frank Kemp writes to Geoff Lowden with regard to the proposed ballot of ACU&S members. In the course of that letter he advises that ECB decline to take part in the ballot because:
"Given your proposal to make one of the ballot options the continuance of ACU&S, ECB believes that it would be premature to hold a ballot of ACU&S members in the near future. It would be first necessary to confirm the financial viability of ACU&S and indeed it would be appropriate to include a financial summary with the ballot papers
… I raised a number of concerns during the meeting (of 18th April at the ECB offices) and having had the opportunity to look at the figures in more detail I have significant concerns about the current and projected financial position of ACU&S.
You will be aware that, in April 2005, ECB offered to assist ACU&S in establishing the true financial position of ACU&S. With the benefit of the information that is now in the public domain it is not surprising that certain members of General Council were adamantly opposed to this offer …
…The ECB remains willing to provide resources from our Finance Department, without charge to ACU&S, to carry out such a review… We do not believe that members can be asked to vote in a ballot that includes the proposition that ACU&S continues as an independent organisation if this is not a realistic proposition given the current and projected financial position.
To illustrate the concerns that I have may I pose a few questions arising from the papers that you gave to me yesterday:
These are only indicative questions and the list is not intended to be comprehensive …
1st May 2006
Steven Wood, General Secretary and a member of the Committee of Enquiry (chaired by Colin Pearson) that prepared a report so damaging that General Council, having itself appointed the committee, then tried so hard to bury the report and made it available only when we obtained and published a copy, replied to Frank Kemp with the following:
… Of course you are right to be concerned about the ability of ACU&S to survive.
Fortunately the Association is not a complex trading organisation. The main income of the Association is members' subscriptions….
The ATA has advised that, barring any unforeseen expenditure, there is money available to cover the anticipated expenditure of the Association in the current financial year …
A decision has already been taken for a substantial increase in subscriptions for next year. The one area of uncertainty is the number of members who may, for one reason or another, fail to renew their membership of ACU&S next year. No accountant could predict what that figure might be, as it depends on what others do, as well as what ACU&S has to offer, when the time comes.
Current membership is increasing …
If the financial situation is tight, then I would suggest that a significant contributory factor is the withdrawal of the traditional funding from ECB. Many members are incensed that ECB has withdrawn financial support from the Association in these circumstances. The point is made that ECB receive funding from the Sports Council, recognising that ECB is supporting recreational cricket. It is argued that the money is not yours to withhold, and certainly if the money is not paid this point will be aired publicly …
At the moment ACU&S is the only provider of training and assessment of umpires and scorers. There is no way ECB could possibly run, next winter, the number and variety of training courses run by ACU&S during this last close season, unless there was wholesale defection of training officers and examiners, which is unlikely …
4th May 2006
This, with its lack of actual financial detail and ignorance of the background to the grant, prompted Frank Kemp to respond:
… I appreciate that you have only recently taken over as General Secretary and may not have been apprised of all the facts relating to the ECB Grant to ACU&S but your comments suggest a lack of understanding of the nature of the grant and its history. ECB has made a grant to ACU&S, from ECB funds, each year since the formation of ECB in 1997. The grant was initially £10,000, rising to £20,000 in 2000 and to £25,000 in 2001. The grant is in no way tied to any funding from the 'Sports Council' or other public bodies.
When it became clear, during and after the ACU&S AGM in March 2005 and the election of a new Chairman, that the financial position of ACU&S was precarious and that the information made available to members and to the ECB did not give a clear or accurate indication of the actual state of the finances, ECB withheld the 2005 grant pending clarification of the financial position. In June 2005 a cheque for £25,000 was passed to your President on the basis that:
(i) the cheque would be held uncashed until the financial position had been clarified; and (ii)the grant would only be used to ensure that umpires and scorers were covered for insurance purposes in 2006.
The cheque was cashed immediately.
We understand that insurance cover has remained in place but the only financial information made available to the ECB has been the papers which Geoff Lowden passed to me on 18 April 2006 and which I queried extensively in my letter dated 19 April 2006. As stated earlier, it is disappointing that these queries have not been answered and that the financial position remains entirely unclear.
The ECB Board of Directors decided in November 2005 to authorise the establishment of the ECB Officials Association and it has consistently been made clear to ACU&S that the annual grant would no longer be paid as the funding has been allocated to support the costs of ECB OA.
The position if the ECB remains as stated in my letter dated 19 April 2006 … This position was endorsed by the Board of Directors when it met on 3 May 2006.
… Our offer to assist ACU&S in validating the current and projected financial position of ACU&S remains open … However we are taking active steps to ensure that ECB OA can meet all the objectives that we have set for it in the best interests of umpires and scorers and of the game.
So there we have it. What is it about membership of General Council that seems to sap all commonsense and reason from its members? The new General Secretary has been in office just five minutes and he has already shown an inability to master his brief - and picked yet another fight with the ECB in the process!
There seems to be a wilful refusal on the part of anybody on GC to face the facts - and an even more worrying determination to ensure that nobody gets to look at the books. Mr. Wood's naive comment about the inability of accountants to predict membership levels contained one element of truth - the last lot were unable to spot a scam even when we pointed it out to them, far less predict! As for the comment about trainers and examiners being unlikely to defect, we would question whether "defection" is a suitable word to use in this context, especially with financial collapse of ACU&S being more than just a possibility.
Still, to every cloud there is a silver lining, they say, and Mr. Wood has at least rattled one cage.
Tony Bastable wrote:
Steven:
I am in possession of a scanned copy of a letter from you to Frank Kemp of the ECB, dated May 1.
In this letter, referring to ICUS, you state "The Institute has been set up by those officers of ACU&S who have brought the current problems upon the Association."
This is untrue.
I am one of those 'officers' - the Media Officer. As the 'current problems' have their roots in finance - the lack of same - I fail to see how I could conceivably 'have brought the current problems upon the Association."
Either justify this wholly unwarranted slur upon my reputation or send me a fulsome apology by return - copied to Frank Kemp for onward transmission to his ECBOA.
Tony Bastable
From: STEVEN WOOD
To: Tony Bastable
Cc: various others
Subject: Re; Your letter to Frank Kemp
Tony
As Cathy points out, all members of General Council at the time, have to accept some responsibility for the current problems.
Of course, those problems do not relate to all aspects of the Association.
From: Tony Bastable
Sent: 18 May 2006 22:57
To: STEVEN WOOD
Cc: the same address list
Subject: Re: Your letter to Frank Kemp
Steven:
No this won't do, and you know it. Apart from anything else, I am not - and never have been - a member of General Council! Do not attempt to scuttle off to hide behind one tiny phrase in what Cathy has written. You have made a major error of judgement. At least have the courtesy to acknowledge that.
Apology by return, please, copied to all recipients AND Frank Kemp.
Tony Bastable
Since early last year when we first began to question the ethics and legality of what Barrie Stuart-King and his devoted followers were doing to the Association we have been constantly vilified and lied about, particularly with unfounded and unsubstantiated allegations that we had brought, or attempted to bring, the Association down by our actions. One of the principal purveyor of these lies has been Tony Bastable, the mouthpiece for the ICUS.
We find it rich that this very man should now be whining that he is being misrepresented - what irony!
Is Bastable saying that he knew nothing of what was going on? As we know and can prove, all the way through "media@acus.org.uk" was copied with almost every e-mail that dealt with the leases and with BS-K's alleged dealings with potential sponsors. He knew, and through approval of the material appearing in "How's That?", gave his full backing and unequivocal support to it all.
Again, although he was not a member of General Council, he cannot deny having been its official spin-doctor and speechwriter for some years. When did he ever query anything it said or did? Did he write an article or letter questioning the truth of the statements made at the 2005 AGM? If he did, we must have missed it somehow.
Is what Cathy Rawson wrote really "a tiny phrase"? It is a pretty big statement when you think about it. Is it not Bastable who is seeking the shelter of a technicality here? Does he really claim to have no responsibility for anything? He has been hand in glove with those on General Council who first caused its problems and then sneaked away to set up ICUS - about which there may be interesting news to break fairly soon - with Bastable himself once again writing its propaganda. (On 19th February, on the ICUS website, it was he who wrote thus: "Many might feel that, far from suspending the named Members from office, it might have been more appropriate to thank them, encourage them, and join them in working hard for the long-term interests of both the membership and recreational cricket as a whole!"). If he is so far removed from General Council, if he has had so little influence over it, if he has made so small a contribution to its deliberations, how is it that he has been the Media Officer for such a length of time and is now central to the ICUS farrago? I was just following orders, was the plea at Nurnberg. Is this his claim now?
Is it not time for Bastable to try to maintain a respectable silence for once? Since he took office as Media Officer, he has done nothing remotely useful for ACU&S, nothing remotely useful for cricket, so far as we can see, nothing remotely honourable, nothing remotely honest. He has lied, and invented, and ranted, and postured. If apologies are required, they should be coming from him, prior to his retiring from the scene once and for all.
He will not be missed.